About your Search

Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
moreen beganin who is the chief financial officer and i think she gives us very accurate information and tell uses the direction we need togo in. i know the chief and i have faith in her and it's well placed. we have made fewer arrests and i think that will continue to occur. again we are focusing our efforts on moving forward but if there is anything you would like me to address now i'm on the administration side of the police department please don't hesitant to let me know either face-to-face or by email you all have my email address. >> thank you chief. >> any questions for me? okay thank you. >> good evening director griffin. >> good evening commissioners. this is a follow up presentation to one that was made back in september of last year, and we talked at that time about arrest reporting in san francisco and specifically about ucr, race reporting and ethnicity reporting. the first two slides are from that presentation just as a refresher what we talked about then and the remaining three are from this presentation. so going back what we talked about is why we were reportin
was put out in 2012 and it's been a while and about san francisco arrest stats i wanted us as a commission to hear the information and provide feedback as we have done tonight. to my understanding they held a long hearing on this issue and the chief was in attendance. >> it was a joint hearing with the police commission. >> there was a specific meeting about this specific report that was last year. human rights commission had a meeting on the human impact of drugs. >> and i was there. >> you were there, yes. >> because that is happening and another commission and affects our work that's i didn't wanted us to look at this report and give the chief a chance to respond and make the points you have made and thank you for that and i think the broader context as this relates -- you probably might have heard about this and i want to under score it. there is a professor michelle alexander and aclu attorney and "new jim crow" book and talked about the issues as it relates to drug issues and how that's a civil rights concern and that book has taken off and inspired a lot of people and lead to the
the officer used leave of force to evaluate that use of force against the department policies. we utilize interviews, forensic evidence and other data collected in the course of the criminal investigation. so, we have some of the same dependencies that homicide has, we're piggybacking. >> quick question for you. the next part of the slide say compelled interviewed conducted with involved members. can you explain to the public the difference between when there's -- a we talked about, the criminal investigation and administrative investigation. can you explain to the public that, for example, the officers like any other individual has a fifth amendment privilege and do not need to speak to the prosecutors. however, by law, part of the administrative, they have to talk to pursuant to general orders our investigators, is that correct? >> that's correct. you jumped the gun. you put it in better terms than i would have, commissioner. but yes, we conduct a separate interview for the involved officer. that interview is a compelled interview. the officer is given [speaker not understood], read the
commend him for making use of this public forum in the public comments. there are avenues to registered complaints with the san francisco police department through the department of occ. and mr. harte is well aware of this, but he chose to make negative comments against these officers without knowing their full history within the department. the poa questions his motives for this and his credibility, seeing that he is a self-appointed director of some watchdog organization that has one member, himself. so, we challenge him to produce any evidence that inspector miranda did, in fact, misrepresent himself or the department in front of the city attorney's office. i doubt if he could come forward with that. >> thank you. next speaker. hearing none -- come forward, ma'am. >>> good evening, commissioners. good evening, chief. my name is mary kay coner, and i have worked in san francisco with people who have both psychiatric, neurological, and emotional disabilities and other kinds of disabilities. a ma mort of them who are homeless. in 1996 myself and a group of other people including represe
. >> one more question. similar to the question officer loft us asked about, whether they're out of policy finding have been for the d.a., do you know just in recent history have they ever charged for an ois -- * >> charge an officer? >> um-hm. >> not -- just having reviewed like the last 10 years recently, certainly not in the last 10 years. i'm not offhand aware of a case where there's been a criminal charge. not in my memory. >> not mine either. okay. and then with the firearm discharge review board, you included a list of the composition of that board. and i wanted to ask if there's any changes in that composition. i remember a couple months ago we did talk with the chief, some of us, about including someone from training and potentially from tactics. i wondered if that is in here. >> this reflects the current structure. so, there haven't been any changes. this varies a little bit from the general order because it reflects the change in the department command structure so the general order is a little kind of off, it's a little behind the times a little bit in that regard specifically.
we had the ois report. you mentioned the d.a.'s office. it's really important that -- for us that the d.a. does a thorough review of the investigation because that's the objective third-party eye. you know, they do -- they initiate an investigation at the time they're notified of the shooting. they do some joint work with our homicide unit. they are at the scene. they participate in the interview that the officers of the witnesses, of the suspect. and then they draw their own preliminary conclusion. they conduct their own investigation. they then review what the homicide investigator presented, their burden of proof, as you know, beyond a reasonable doubt. and the d.a. would decide any charging in the matter of any involved party. and as i mentioned, it provides that objective independent analysis of the incident in the criminal investigation. so, we feel that's important. once they finish, their information as i mentioned is their conclusionses are forwarded to the administrative investigator. the administrative investigator at the same time as the on-site investigation, two
the administrative investigation. it can't go to the criminal investigation. it can't be used -- their statement to the administrative investigator to generalize, can't be -- [speaker not understood] you understand, but can't be used to, you know, against the officer in a criminal investigation related to that specific incident except as a matter of impeachment or allowed by a judge. >> is that why information flows one way per that flow chart you showed us? >> that's also true of any disciplinary investigation where there could be a criminal component. it flows one way. there are state laws regarding, you know, the peace officer, peace officer rights and the fact that you have labor file, thing like that. it can flow one direction, it can't flow the other. so, that's not unique to the ois investigation. okay. okay. so, any questions so far? sorry. the administrative investigation again is determining whether the use of lethal force was in accordance with the department of policy. our burden of proof in administering the investigation is the preponderance of the evidence. inve
findings to come to a consensus regarding whether the use of lethal force was in policy, not in policy, or whether further investigation is required. and then the chair, which is again will look at the members of it, the d.c. admin will report the findings to the chief. the board is composed of the deputy chief administration who chairses it, the dc of operations, d.c. of special operations, excuse me, and the d.c. of the airport. and advisory members would be the police -- a police commissioner, the director of occ, the commanding officer of risk management, and the sfpd range master. the findings, as i mentioned before, the chief who reviews them. and if he concurses with the finding, the chief will work the recommendation of the fdrb to the police commission. if the chief does not concur, he would forward his own findings to the police commission. the way that is presented to the police commission is in writing. you've seen the fdrb letters. it's letter format, but it's in writing. it summarizes all the different components of the administrative -- administrative investigation, the
of the taxicabs. they're taking the airport rides. these people aren't insured as ed heely pointed out. these used to be considered gypsy cabs, not because they're using an app. somehow they're innovative entrepreneurs. so, you guys have to do something about this or forget about making any money. you ruined the lives of a lot of drivers already. come on, do something. you know, hire some investigators out there. do your job. >> thank you. anyone else care to address the board under the public comment? okay, seeing none public comment period is closed. director brinkman. >> could we please, director reiskin, get some kind of update on where we stand with not only hiring -- budgeting to hire new inspector to taxi administrative services, but also just where we stand on what we can do about lift inside car and car to go? i did read the new puc rulings. i have to admit i'm a little lost as to where that leaves us and what our options are now. i think it would be really helpful to get an update on that. i know it concerns -- it concerns all of us as city people and taxi riders. >> especially the insur
. >> commissioner [speaker not understood]? >> here. >> mr. president, you have a quorum and also with us this evening is the chief of police gregory p. sur and the director of the office of citizens complaints joyce higgs. >> thank you very much. welcome to the february 6, 2013 san francisco police commission meeting. we have an agenda tonight with the presentation regarding our officer involved shooting protocol and investigations. and we have no disciplinary matters or personnel matters so it should be relatively smooth agenda. so, please call line item number 1. >> line item 1, general public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding item that do not appear on tonight's agenda but that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or occ personnel. under police commission rules of order, during public comment, neither police nor occ personnel, nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public, but
a quorum and also with us is the office of director of complaints hiks and mike baoel. >> thank you very much, inspector monroe, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the january, 30th, 2013 police commission meeting, we will announce after the beginning, after general public comment, we will move briefly into the closed session matter to handle two personal matters. we do that for several reasons, one, the cost of the attorneys and also... and so i think that we need to get and handle that as soon as possible. and as we move to our agenda. without further adieu, please call line item number one. >> line item one, adoption of the minutes, action, amended minutes for september 12, 201 2:singer adopted november, 28, 2012, for the meetings of november 28, december 5th and 19 of 2012. >> commissioners have the minutes in your packet, is there anything that you would like to add? >> i would like to thank them for all of the hard work on the minutes and i know that it is not easy. do we have public comment? hearing none. dpo i have a motion. >> so motion. >> moved, all in favor >> aye. >> line item
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)